The catastrophic occupation of Iraq is evidence of far more than the incompetence of the Bush Administration; it is proof that the conservative worldview is fatally flawed. As the 43rd Presidency staggers to an ignominious finale, liberals must prepare not only to govern America, but also to proclaim a new vision. Liberal foreign policy should be based upon ten elemental concepts:
1. America needs to lead by example, rather than by force. While it seems obvious to most Americans that the United States should practice what it preaches, this essential moral maxim was abandoned by a Bush Administration whose operating philosophy is: "Do what I say, not what I do." Bush conservatism brought a host of problems to US democratic process: stolen elections, denial of civil rights, and unlawful expansion of presidential authority, to mention only a few. Liberal leaders must practice democracy and set foreign policy from that moral ground.
2. Propagating democracy requires a multinational effort, rather than unilateral action. Americans believe that democracy should be spread throughout the world; the question is by what means. Conservatives maintain the US has unique moral status in the world and, therefore, the privilege to govern the world community: "We're the biggest and, therefore, the best." This conceit, the belief in American exceptionalism, serves as an excuse for US imperialism. Liberals believe that a multi-polar effort is required to spread democracy.
3. Democracy cannot be imposed; it has to be nurtured. Bush conservatism argues that American military power can catalyze Western-style democracy in non-democratic states: "Might makes right." Liberals believe that while multinational police forces can protect human rights they can't guarantee democracy.
4. There's more to foreign policy than shaking a big stick. Conservative foreign policy presumes that a strong military is America's best ambassador: "Adopt democracy or we'll shoot you." This big-stick approach hasn't worked in Afghanistan or Iraq and shows no sign of working in the rest of the world. Liberal foreign policy recognizes that diplomacy is an essential tool both in promoting democracy and building coalitions in the national interest.
5. Democracy is not synonymous with capitalism. The Bush Administration advocates a cardboard version of democracy that emphasizes property rights and open markets, and glosses over the necessity for human rights and civil society. Their approach stems from an elemental conservative maxim: "In a democracy, free markets inevitably solve national problems." Predictably the application of this doctrine in non-Western societies produced authoritarian, plutocratic states featuring rampant inequality and environmental degradation.
6. Some emerging democracies cannot support western-style capitalism. Because of their confidence in the power of the open market, Bush conservatives invariably get the cart before the horse: "Ensure capitalism and democracy will surely follow." In many non-western states, democracy must be nurtured-by engendering civil society-before it is strong enough to support free-market capitalism. In the mean time, capitalism must be limited or national resources will be squandered and plutocrats will prevail.
7. The global marketplace is not a substitute for global civil society. Coincident with their belief in spreading democracy through militarism, Bush conservatives have deregulated the international economy. They've promoted globalization in the naïve belief that this would inevitably remedy international economic, environmental, political, and social problems: "The market will provide." The results have been devastating: economic inequality and environmental degradation-to name only two problems--have spiraled out of control. Liberals believe in the importance of international governance.
8. The United Nations and other international organizations need to be revamped rather than abandoned. Conservatives argue that the UN doesn't work and, therefore, should be replaced by a coalition of democracies headed by the United States. They believe that because America is the preeminent world power, it should determine international policy on all important matters: "We're number one; therefore, we call the shots." Liberals argue that America should redefine its role to that of building coalitions, exercising its power judiciously in a multi polar world.
9. America needs to close its overseas military bases and bring American troops home. The United States maintains more than 700 overseas military facilities and has an active military presence in more than forty countries. Bush conservatives argue that this guarantees national security: "We're safer because of our military hegemony." Liberals believe that conservatives continue to fight the cold war; that the socio-political realities of the twenty-first century, and the campaign against terrorism, dictate that the US should bring its troops home, beef up homeland security, and strengthen international alliances.
10. America needs to replace military spending with foreign aid. Conservatives ignore the economic and social roots of terrorism, the reality that rampant globalization fostered the conditions that produced Al Qaeda and related terrorist organizations. In place of a systemic analysis, Bush conservatives proffer platitudes: "They hate us because of our freedoms." Liberals recognize that eliminating the conditions that foster terrorism requires the rich nations of the world to help the poor, to guarantee the elemental human rights that underpin democracy.
The key to transforming US foreign policy is for American liberals to practice democracy at home.
Bob Burnett is a Berkeley writer and Quaker actvist. He is particularly interested in progressive morality and writes frequently on the ethical aspects of political and social issues.
You're on the right track, but you should reconsider certain
assumptions you're making about what "liberalism" is. You're setting up your basic argument as: Conservatism is bad, but liberalism is good. You're also implicitly allowing some weight to the idea that America is a democracy, that it's rightly entitled to "lead the world", and that what we're "really" trying to do is spread democracy throughout the world.
You say it's a mistake to try to spread democracy by force, but we're not trying to spread democracy. We're trying to get control of all the world's vital resources, and the bit about "spreading democracy" is just the pretext. The truth is, we don't care if the rest of the world is in slavery -- as long as it's enslaved by us and serves our interests. // Also: America is not and never has been anything like a real democracy; it's got only a thin superficial veneer of democracy. And it has never earned the moral legitimacy which might entitle it to "lead the world." Actually, it's much more a danger to the world than a potential savior of it. This was true even before Bush, though of course, it's become much easier to see since 2000.
You see "liberalism" as the more decent face of capitalism, but that's not really so. Liberalism is just part of capitalism's ideological machinery. It helps fight capitalism's PR wars, by convincing inhabitants of the so-called "democracies" that their global actions have moral justification. But any time there's a conflict between the needs of capitalism and the morality of liberalism, the former wins every time. Liberalism is designed to bend on its knees to capitalism, so that it can only appear "moral" when it's not in conflict with what capitalism needs. And since capitalism is inherently brutish, this makes liberalism intrinsically hypocritical and weak.
by
Richard Mynick (2 articles, 3 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 1232 comments)
on Thursday, March 1, 2007 at 10:57:19 AM
I would sure like to see a Democratic presidential candidate run on this 10 point program. What a high moral and idealistic ground the candidate would be taking. Let the nay sayers criticize these arguments. That would cause the ten points to be adjusted and thereby strengthened. Think of the significant, in-depth level of discussion such a policy statement by a candidate would generate. Wouldn't it be an exciting and constructive effort by a candidate to offer such a comprehensive program --instead of vague sound bites--to put our country back on track.
by
Christie (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 143 comments)
on Thursday, March 1, 2007 at 6:35:09 PM
Those are very good points. The thought that the United States acts upon principles which are dedicated toward peace and humanity and common justice and respect for the smaller states has been within the hearts of most Americans.
Regretably that essense of late have been lost in a rhetorical selfishness of the Administration. I further agree with post that it is toward America that is the vision that the nation shall respond-- if a candidate can so rise and articulate.
by
Eliot Gould (13 articles, 0 quicklinks, 21 diaries, 140 comments)
on Thursday, March 1, 2007 at 7:30:48 PM
"evidence of far more than the incompetence of the Bush Administration; it is proof that the conservative worldview is fatally flawed"
Perhaps you misread the situation. The situation is going exactly as required by those calling the shots. What those in charge want is a fragmented Iraq, a subjugated Iran and an abolished Syria and Lebanon, and they are well on the way to achieving all this. Oh, they also want all the oil in the middle-east, including that of Saudi Arabia, and they are obtaining their objective bit by bit.
So far as your ten points are concerned, fine, but in the interest of the rest of the world and for a prospect of some kind of permanence, what about rooting out the cause of the evils of the world today. The alternative is simply prolonging the present status quo, and that is unacceptable to any who wish any future for humanity.
So, the cause is . . .? How do you spell Rothschild and their tribe? And take down all who have aided them so far.
Quite a few will have to be named and will have to go, and our political structures will have to be overhauled to root out its present corruption worldwide, but there's no sense in waiting. - Unless chaos and extinction is your ambition too, of course.
by
amazin (34 articles, 0 quicklinks, 12 diaries, 400 comments)
on Friday, March 2, 2007 at 6:51:03 AM
4 comments
How would you rate this?
You must be logged in (if signed up) to do ratings.
It's free to signup! And easy. And takes just a minute or two....
Must Read (
Well Said (
News (
Touching (
Funny (
Supported (
Interesting (
Inspiring (
Valuable (
